Old Bomber Fan

I agree the refs have to be concerned with injuries no question and how are they to know if it is fake or otherwise. There is no rationalization just a simple observation. Do I think it is right, absolutely not but until there is a methodology to prevent it and keep players safe, then it will continue. Sad but true.

Unfortunately the "fake" injuries is within the rules as they are now. The fact that an opposition coach, regardless of who it is, decides to use this to slow down our offense and turn that to his advantage is called coaching, sorry. It may not look good, it may put a smudge on the CFL but it is allowed, at least as of now. Did it have any consequence to the outcome of the game, I highly doubt it. We lost that game in the first quarter and were not going to recover. We were outcoached, out prepared, and outplayed from the get go. The offensive and defensive schemes were terrible no other way to say it. Even to the selection of who played and didn't, we were beat from the get go. Keep in mind we have 2 on the injured list they have 17!! and still dominated. I commented awhile back and everyone accused me of being a wagon jumper etc. All I was saying and continue to say is Sask beat two western division teams handily, we scraped by one of them and lost to the other. They are not far behind us, if at all, and are playing dominating football. We continue to scrape by eastern division teams whom we all know are much weaker than the western division. So now we will see what kind of coaching and team we have in the second half, most of which is against the west I believe. We might do well at the Banjo Bowl, I'm sure hoping we will but time will tell.

I said that wrong and got roasted for it. I DON"T go to build beer snakes and get drunk, I go to watch and study the game. My bad. As for the negativity, my belief it is honest observation sorry I don't wear rose coloured glasses.

I don't believe I said I like the likes of Reibolt, Burke or the rest that were quoted. I do believe I said I endured their tenures as I have endured MOS's tenure. So let's be clear on that. As for band wagon jumping or whatever you want to call it, because someone choses not to go to football games to be unentertained for many years.... yet still continues to cheer for the team while pointing out what he/she believes to be issues with the product on the field or in head office....does that make them non fans??? I think not. If someone was to simply turn their back on the team and not cheer or give a d... what happens to it, well then I guess you could call them band wagon jumping. Sorry there is a difference. I'm one of those people who used to go to the ball game to be entertained and cheer for my team, I was not entertained for many years and after a period of time enough is enough. Because I have a summer residents and spend 3 hours each game day to sit through a debacle it was not worth my time and effort to support in that manner. Also I am one of those who go there to get drunk and make beer snakes and be oblivious to the game itself. I'm not say any one who comments negatively to my posts are these individuals simply that those spectacles are not what I call football fans even though they may have season tickets or have purchased tickets to a game. So the overall experience was one I decided to avoid BUT it doesn't take away my desire for the team to succeed. I guess the question I would ask is: are those who do not live close by or cannot attend a game for whatever reason still fans or are they less fans or even band wagon jumpers.

Goalie; guess you don't know what jumping off the band wagon truly is so that is about as far as I'll go in responding to you. Shallow, and non respective of others opinions....sad

I said last week that before I would say this team is a good team they would have to play against the top tier teams in the league and should they play well and beat them then I would say yes they are playing well and deserve the praise they were given. Well they played well again this week and against a 7-0 Eskimos. Yes the Edmonton have several injuries but nonetheless we controlled the clock and ran over them it seemed at will. Congratulations to them and the coaches. My only concern is Carmichael and will if ever will MOS agree he is not that good of a ball player. He was burnt yet again this time for 2 touchdowns and seems to be trying to catch the ball rather than first attempting to bat it down. Let's see what happens in the next few weeks. We had over 500 yards of offense which says to me that LaPolice has finally come out of his shell and is calling some longer passes and mixing up the calls well....good for him. Hall needs to do better with the defense. We gave up over 470 yards of offense and while there were what 3 big plays it nonetheless has to be reduced. Congrats Bombers you are doing well.

not sure of the meaning of the post regarding shorts so will dismiss this one. As for the other querry, well simply put yes we were on a par with BC last year and played them hard this year...ok I get it but remember they are in a tie for 3rd with us and are a far stretch from Calgary or Edmonton, so I will stand by my point that when we start beating the top tier in the league then I will consider them a top tier team....simple. As for Edmonton having a hard time with Hamilton, I will agree they did but did you forget the injury list that is Edmonton's? I will venture to say ours is a lot less than theirs and while all teams should have replacements capable of stepping up, they seem to have that whereas we are more challenged. Hey I'm a fan as you are but I guess I might be just a little more objective than others. We are not killing the league in offense and certainly not defense but hey they are playing well in all three phases right now against lower tier teams. Let's just wait and see until after the weekend and then I think we will all have a better idea of what kind of team this is. We know right now for sure, they don't quit and good on them for that.

A well deserved victory for Winnipeg. Still am a little unsettled on the offensive play calling, we seem content to settle for field goals when we get inside their 30. Think there has to be a more distinct effort to salt away the games early. Other than that I thought it was an all round good game. BUT and I don't want to rain on the parade, BUT it was Hamilton and they are not a good team right now. I believe our true test will be when we play Edmonton. The Sask games should be victories if they continue on the same path but that means we beat the teams below us and we have to beat the teams above us to be successful. In any event if we continue at this rate, beat the teams below us that is, we will cross over to the east and get a bye I believe. Easy way to the Grey Cup. The team is rounding into forum and if that continues I will gladly take back my words that I have posted here before. Again cautious only because the wins are against low standing teams BUT nonetheless wins.

My only comment for this game is do not take Hamilton lightly......should they.....well we will come home with a loss. We only beat Ottawa by a last second field goal....they played tough with Edmonton and I'm sure they are a very frustrated group. Taking them lightly would not be a good issue.

Let me be the first to congratulate the Big Blue on their win in Ottawa. Like so many others it was nip and tuck til the final whistle and I guess that is what MOS is preaching. It would be nice to be able to sew up a victory prior to the last play but hey as many have said a win is a win. What I did like about this game and I believe noted several times is it was the most complete game to date. I especially appreciated seeing the offense do something that they don't do often....throw downfield. While the completion rate wasn't that good ( I don't have a stat just an observation) it nonetheless kept the defense honest and did open up some stuff underneath. I also appreciated seeing the 2 back system. Why waste a valuable asset on the bench when he is much more valuable on the field and I don't think Harris minds in the least. Still not totally sold on the secondary and very unsure of Carmichael at all. Let's see what happens this weekend against the worst team in the league standing wise. Ottawa was the second worst in records so we have beaten all eastern teams we have played, just one more to go. Should we win then we will have beaten every team below us in the standings and lost to everyone who is above us. I'm thinking that will have to change if we want to progress beyond the first switchover playoff game as if it doesn't we won't get any further. I'm still not convinced we will end up better than 11-7 but for the time being they have won more than they have lost and that can't be bad. Good on them.

Was not going to respond to the comments then thought again. Yes there have been terrible coaches over the past what 15 years at least. However non of those continued the rosy picture and arrogance that MOS has displayed even with a losing record. Many of those poor coaches were not given as much rope as he has been given and for what???? That might be a good question. I stuck it out through thick and thin in the hopes that things might turn around but unfortunately things are not getting better even though our "talent" has apparently improved according to MOS and Miller. So what is the bottom line. No I have played, coached and watched enthusiastically most sports and I continue to watch most with the hope the result is a win however I believe I know when to call a spade a spade and unfortunately to those who disagree, I guess you haven't reached that level yet. It is fine to disagree with one's opinion and certainly fine to voice your own but it is another to question the character of the opposite opinioned person. Sorry you disagree but sometimes the truth is hard to swallow. I said at the beginning of the year that they would be lucky to be 11-7, same as last year but many of you said they improved so much without considering the other teams improving as well. I'm not a Sask fan but watch out they are a game back of us. Let's see who is right at the end of the season

Well sorry for going against the flow on this one....I think he hit it on the head. I have never liked MOS's attitude from the get go. He is far too stubborn to be a head coach responsible for making decisions that will help the team win be it either during the game and game decisions or manpower decisions. The points that were made were spot on regarding his unwillingness to sit Willy, sit other starters who were underperforming etc. It was only when he was told to give Nichols a shot after a terrible 1-4 start and then by luck inserted a few rookies due to injury namely Loffler and Fogg that the team started to move. I believe there was also a move to insert Bond on the OL line but I may be wrong with that one. Point is he cannot make a manpower decision effectively and his game decisions are terrible. He is one of the reasons I did not keep my season tickets after many years.....it was obvious what the outcome was going to be and I didn't want to spend 1 1/2 hours driving into the city to watch what I KNEW was going to be another loss and not a close one at that.....then if by luck it was a close one to be lost with a bone head decision by the head coach, only to have to wait over 1/2 hour to leave and face another 1 1/2 hour drive back home. And to top it all off I couldn't leave early because the shuttle bus didn't leave until it was full near the end of the game. I won't mention IGF which is another story of its own. Suffice to say, Mr MOS was a huge reason why I stopped going. Do I follow them on TV, yes I do but I have the privilege to turn it off when I chose. Do I wish them well, certainly do and will always but reality is they will never win a Grey Cup or get to it with MOS as head coach......so the article is bang on....at least in my opinion

I believe several here have the right idea. While our backups should be ready to step up when a starter is injured, and that may be the case in some instances, it still remains that the defence is giving up far too many yards. Frankly I don't care what Montreal, Saskatchewan, Calgary or BC does simply put our defense ranks near the last in most categories. The fact that even Hall admits he doesn't like the yardage given.....but he will take it if we win.... well that say a lot. I agree prevent defenses work if the other team makes mistakes....can't hold onto a short pass or is stopped running on second and long....AKA Blue Bombers.... but they have to make the mistake we don't have to make them make one. It is quite simple actually on defense I believe you have to make the other team make mistakes and if you are giving them yards to make first downs then you are in trouble....AKA Montreal last game. As for back ups well if they are as good as the starters there should be no speed bumps to hurdle, but if the scheme is incorrect it doesn't really matter starter or backup there will be issue.

I think Mr Noeller you are being paid by the Blue and Gold to monitor this site and present as positive a position that you can. Even Ed Tait who is a paid employee tells it more like it is. Of course you have to tell it like it is....if not, you lie right off the bat and where do you go from there? By at least being honest with players and fans alike everyone gets the true picture and then can make a somewhat educated decision going forward. I akin this to the constant before season hype from the Bombers year in and year out....first it was rebuilding so don't expect a lot. Then when that slant didn't work it was all about the quality of players that the scouts have brought it... a huge improvement that will create good competition at training camp....yet we see the same players and most if not all the recruits either on the PR or cut. An improvement? Then we heard we signed all the coaching staff because it created continuity and that is always good....and referencing teams like Calgary and Edmonton. Well Edmonton changed coaches, not by choice but nonetheless did and in the first year made the playoffs while losing many of their starters and much of the coaching staff the year previous. Calgary only seems to find quality players whether it be from the PR or scouting.....year in and year out. We don't do that! We simply rely on the old lines of much improved this year. Then as the year progresses it is an injury issue as if no other team in the league has injuries and finally at the end of the year it comes down to a few plays here and there that caused us to miss the playoffs again.....all the while our coach talks about how great the players are and how hard they work. No one is saying they don't play hard, no one is saying they are not talented. Perhaps what they are saying is these players are not being put in a position to win....not being put in a position to display their skills....not being coached according to their skills versus what the coaches think they should able to do. I realize there is a give and take here but let's be realistic.....this is a team that, at least in my opinion, is underperforming in several areas and these areas are consistent year in and year out. Bad coaching decisions by the head coach, an ineffective offense hell bent on dink and dunk where every team in the league knows it and doesn't even plan for the maybe one or two times we may get lucky downfield, and an ineffective defense that cannot seem to cover receivers period. Yes we do stop the run most games but the pass.....well that is simply another story. Are they coached properly....well whenever I see a DB trying to defend a pass and he is neither looking at the receivers eyes to see when the ball is coming or looking for the ball but simply flaying away at the air, then I see poor coaching or poor individual habits. Can it be taught, certainly but these guys are not rookies coming direct from college....most have played professional football somewhere so is it that they haven't learned, won't learn, or can't learn......or is it the coaches can't teach it. I guess what I am trying to say is while I understand that you want to put a positive spin on everything, this does not mean you are a better bomber fan than those who talk about their shortcomings and who are frankly finished with the BS that keeps coming forth from this organization. We all want them to win and again frankly no one more so than myself. I haven't invested over 63 years watching and listening to this team so I can be fed total nonsense. When Bud Grant was the coach or Cal Murphy, there was no mincing words on the quality of product on the field. They expected to win and were coached that way. It was unacceptable to be substandard and while that did not always translate to winning, it nonetheless led to competitive, aggressive football that was both entertaining and rewarding to the players and fans. What we see today is neither. So because people speak about what they perceive to be issues with this team....they do so as a fan and someone who expects more.

I will refresh everyone's memory about LaPolice; he came here as OC when Worman was fired because Charles Roberts, a second year player rebelled against Worman and it was either him or Worman to leave. The offense was good that year and LaPolice took over that offense and did little to change it. When he tried the subsequent year after his hiring the offense went down the tubes. He did win a Grey Cup with Saskatchewan however. For those of you who suggest we just lost to a top tier team, you are correct. Regardless of score. We had to go into overtime to win our first game against Saskatchewan because of stupid coaching decisions in the 4th quarter; we lost to Calgary plain and simple; we nearly lost to Toronto in the 4th quarter and only Heath's INT prevented that from happening as Toronto was doing exactly what BC did except they didn't quite make it. In BC again up by 2 TDs and look what happened; we were fighting for our lives because we couldn't move the ball and we couldn't stop them from moving the ball. It seems pretty clear to me....we don't play football in the 4th quarter....our coaches are afraid to lose.....not try to win. It is a mentality that will quickly if not already slip into the players minds. I will say I was pleased with the penalty count for us....not sure how many but they were nonfactors for a change which was great. Lots of work to do mostly by the coaches and GM

great chart! It verifies one aspect I referred to and that is our QB can't throw the long ball. With the worst completion percentage in the league and third in attempts, well that speaks for itself. I also notice our receivers are standing waiting for the ball a lot; not sure if by design or otherwise but the other teams we have played, their receivers are in full stride most of the time when the ball arrives. Just saying.

not so sure they are subjective. I think they would be compiled by going over film and counting the number of throws to various receivers and catches etc. They would be subjective in the regard of difficulty per catch yes you are right but when you see Adams make a one handed catch or the others from BC making circus catches then I would guess that would count toward the stat and some of the subjectivity would be eliminated? But yes you are right in the fact the difficulty of the catch would be subjective, the rest not so sure

The stat that is referred to was shown on TSN at half time I believe and showed who made the most unlikely catches as those quarterbacks who benefited from them. I believe they only tell one part of the story, the other being the accuracy and attempts by a QB. It is worthy of note and has been mentioned here that both QBs threw for 28 completions while one nearly doubled the other in yardage. Further our average yards per completion is below 10 yards and is likely near the bottom of the league. While I think there is a place for dink and dunk, to rely on it only throughout a game only suggests to me that the opposition need not worry about the long ball because either our QB can't throw it consistently like Lulay, Ray or Rielly OR our OC doesn't believe in it OR a combination of both which then suggests while Nichols may be somewhat efficient in TD to INT ratio, and that is changing quickly, he is not perhaps the QB that will take us to where we want to go. If our STs were to take LaPolice's attitude toward their phase of the game, we would never see the trick plays we have seen and the improvements that we normally see. Yes it can be argued that we had over 300 yds of offense and over 400 last game but to play for a tie in perhaps 3 of our 4 games is not acceptable if you are supposed to have a winning attitude and football club. Just my opinion.

gee wiz other teams start rookies in their line up and they don't choke in the 4th quarter. We don't have the depth of other teams I agree but its the play calling that sends our offense off the field when we should be trying to keep it on the field. As I said 3 - 5 yard passes ain't going to do it sorry.

How many passes were thrown at Dressler? How many passes were thrown at Denmark....two money receivers and they get what 4 passes their way? Oh I know BC may have keyed on Dressler but he is shifty enough to get open on occasion rather than running that sweep. Our receivers all seem to be standing still waiting for the ball instead of running into it...not sure if it is them or the QB or the play but that has to change. And finally how many times did we throw the ball more than 15 yards? Frankly LaPolice said he learned so much last year and that was the same as it always has been. Hall's defense isn't good enough at least in the secondary and our head coach is a nut case!

Goat of the game shared by MOS for his stupid call on 3rd down and LaPolice for idiotic play calling in the 4th quarter. When will he ever learn that the dink and dunk does not work especially when the other team in trying to hold you. We also cannot play defense in our secondary at all! They won't throw to Randle's side but Carmichael even though he had a pick is terrible in fact that whole side is. We can't cover one on one and our zone isn't much better.

Cant kill the clock or get a first down with 3-5 yd passes. Way to go lapolice

Cant kill the clock or get a first down with 3-5 yd passes. Way to go lapolice

Cant kill the clock or get a first down with 3-5 yd passes. Way to go lapolice

Cant kill the clock or get a first down with 3-5 yd passes. Way to go lapolice